What the fuck did I do #2 From this thread The story so far : " >PC is married >Spends sometimes years at a time away from his wife >Who is established by his own request as a saucy barmaid >He never sends money >She ends up cucking him with the innkeeper >Player founds out and throws an IRL tantrum >Screaming at me, pounding the table, spittle flying >He has to be restrained by his best friend from attacking me >We can hear him still shouting and crying outside as his friend takes him home
What the fuck did I do? "
Again you lie and misrepresent. Here's the full post
>And he could have killed her. He could have killed both of them. I would have allowed it. And then he probably would have had to deal with the fact that he murdered a popular man in the town and the local lord would have sent men to at least investigate why he killed him. >Even in the middle ages you couldn't ride around butchering people without explaining yourself. And who you could kill and who you couldn't kill was often a matter of discretion for the local lord. If he liked the innkeeper, it probably would have gone badly. If not, he might have been convinced to turn a blind eye for a fee or a favour.
Daniel Walker
You seriously think you could just murder someone and nobody would ask any questions? Not the barkeep's family? Or his debtors and creditors? Or the local lord who presumable taxes him and so he is a source of income for the lord? Do you really not see the point where I said it could go either way? Did you really not see the bit where the lord might try to squeeze the PC because he's in his power? With the implication that the PC might be able to try and turn the tables on the lord who did that?
Are you really this idiotic? This much of a spastic? Or are you just a dishonest lying troll. My vote is on the latter
Camden Cruz
Would it have been any different if the wife wasn't in the PC's backstory, but he met her as an NPC in game, got married and then neglected her?
Jayden Murphy
Okay, so they ask questions, and the answer is "they were adulterers", at which point the questions stop, or the investigation deems that this is true, because it is, and you stop harassing the player.
Alternatively we can step back from this ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS HYPOTHETICAL, because your player DID NOT KILL EITHER OF THEM. This bullshit doesn't even matter at all
The real point is that you wanted to pin consequences on him, no matter what. You wouldn't have stopped until you somehow managed to drag the player kicking and screaming into a plot they didn't enjoy. Why? Because you're That DM.
Lincoln Ramirez
Why are all these hobbits asian?
Jose Hill
OP is a retard, a cuck fetishist and a sociopath.
Hudson Reed
So if a GM puts any type of infidelity into a game, that means he's a cuck fetishist? If he puts murder into a game, is he a gore fetishist? If he puts theft into a game, is he a kleptomaniac?
Gavin Martin
I vote we name the next thread the Cuckposting General.
Josiah Russell
Also that user was talking about the PC taking his hypothetical kids with him, not killing the adulterers. Why would the lord give a flying fuck about someone taking back their kids?
Ian Ross
>Making another thread You're as fucking bad as the "Wyrd" autistic faggot that couldn't keep his fucking spaghetti in his pants and spilled his autism into three different threads.
